| Competition 2 | Competition 3 | MessageBoard | Search inexpressible | Books | Contact Us |
| Home |
|
|
inexpressible.com |
|
| Competition 2 | Competition 3 | MessageBoard | Search inexpressible | Books | Contact Us | | Home | | |
| 2008 US Presidential Determination - Reasons (Formally Accepted) Pertaining to John Kerry |
Is George Bush (from the Republican Party), John Kerry (from the Democratic Party), Walter Brown (from the Socialist Party U.S.A.), Ralph Nader (from the Reform Party), Michael Badnarik (from the Libertarian Party), or David Cobb (from the Green Party of the U.S.) the more reasonable U.S. presidential candidate in terms of the collective well-being of the entire world?
Principle definitions:
More reasonable refers to the reasons supporting one presidential candidate being more sound and consistent than the reasons supporting all other presidential candidates. (For further discussion on more reasonableness see the methodology of more reasonableness.)
General role of U.S. President refers to the highest individual decision-maker in the U.S. Federal government including the Federal government’s final decision-maker in national security emergencies.
Basis for evaluation refers to the collective well-being of the entire world.
Collective well-being refers to the best interests of all (living) life-forms on Earth as a whole.
Entire world refers to all (living) human beings and all other (living) life-forms on Earth.
AGAINST:
“The policies that are currently put forward by both major candidates [i.e. Bush and Kerry] lack any real concern for the 'people'.
Brown does propose free health care, and I like his idea for worker owned farming co-ops and natural resources.
Nader has a couple of good ideas. However, I get the impression that he has merely put forward a 'platform' to differentiate himself from the 'major' candidates. I would suspect his motives.”
October 4 2004
Reasons for/against Bush Reasons for/against Brown Reasons for/against Badnarik
Methodology and Conditions Submission form